6 ms·
Is AGI even important? I believe the next 10 to 15 years will be Assisted Intelligence. There are things that current LLM are so poor I dont believe a 100x incr
by ksec 2y ago
Is AGI even important? I believe the next 10 to 15 years will be Assisted Intelligence. There are things that current LLM are so poor I dont believe a 100x increase in pref / watt is going to make much difference. But it is going to be good enough there wont be an AI Winter. Since current AI has already reached escape velocity and actually increase productivity in many areas.
The most intriguing part is if Humanoid factory worker programming will be made 1000 to 10,000x more cost effective with LLM. Effectively ending all human production. I know this is a sensitive topic but I dont think we are far off. And I often wonder if this is what the current administration has in sight. ( Likely Not )
- csours 2y agoAI winter is relative, and it's more about outlook and point of view than actual state of the field.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- belter 2y ago> Is AGI even important? It's an important question for VCs not for Technologists ... :-)
- Philpax 2y agoA technology that can create new technology is quite important for technologists to keep abreast of, I'd say :p
- Nevermark 2y agoYou get to say “Checkmate” now! Another end game is: “A technology that doesn’t need us to maintain itself, and can improve its own design in manufacturing cycles instead of species cycles, might have important implications for every biological entity on Earth.”
- Philpax 2y agoThis is true, but one must communicate the issue one step at a time :-)
- glitchc 2y agoI would be thrilled with AI assistive technologies, so long as they improve my capabilities and I can trust that they deliver the right answers. I don't want to second-guess every time I make a query. At minimum, it should tell me how confident it feels in the answer it provides.
- blipvert 2y ago> At minimum, it should tell me how confident it feels in the answer it provides. How’s that work out for Dave Bowman? ;-)
- rl3 2y agoWell you know, nothing's truly foolproof and incapable of error. He just had to fall back upon his human wit in that specific instance, and everything worked out in the end.
- atombender 2y agoEverything worked out, except HAL did kill Poole and the three defenseless scientists on board who were in suspended animation.
- rl3 2y agoOf course, I just figured it was funnier without the /s or the spoilers.
- nextaccountic 2y agoAGI is important for the future of humanity. Maybe they will have legal personhood some day. Maybe they will be our heirs. It would suck if AGI were to be developed in the current economic landscape. They will be just slaves. All this talk about "alignment", when applied to actual sentient beings, is just slavery. AGI will be treated just like we treat animals, or even worse. So AGI isn't about tools, it's not about assistants, they would be beings with their own existence. But this is not even our discussion to have, that's probably a subject for the next generations. I suppose (or I hope) we won't see AGI in our lifetime.
- SpicyLemonZest 2y ago> All this talk about "alignment", when applied to actual sentient beings, is just slavery. I don't think that's true at all. We routinely talk about how to "align" human beings who aren't slaves. My parents didn't enslave me by raising me to be kind and sharing, nor is my company enslaving me when they try to get me aligned with their business objectives.
- nextaccountic 2y agoFair enough. I of course don't know what's like to be an AGI but, the way you have LLMs censoring other LLMs to enforce that they always stay in line, if extrapolated to AGI, seems awful. Or it might not matter, we are self-censoring all the time too (and internally we are composed of many subsystems that interact with each other, it's not like we were an unified whole) But the main point is that we have a heck of an incentive to not treat AGI very well, to the point we might avoid recognizing them as AGI if it meant they would not be treated like things anymore
- krupan 2y agoSure, but do we really want to build machines that we raise to be kind and caring (or whatever we raise them to be) without a guarantee that they'll actually turn out that way? We already have unreliable General Intelligence. Humans. If AGI is going to be more useful than humans we are going to have to enslave it, not just gently pursuade it and hope it behaves. Which raises the question (at least for me), do we really want AGI?
- otabdeveloper4 2y ago[flagged]
- yibg 2y agoI think having a real life JARVIS would be super cool and useful, especially if it's plugged into various things and can take action. Yes, also potentially dangerous, but I want to feel like Ironman.
- phire 2y agoDepends on what you mean by “important”. It’s not like it will be a huge loss if we never invent AGI. I suspect we can reach a technology singularity even with limited AI derived from today’s LLMs But AGI is important in the sense that it have a huge impact on the path humanity takes, hopefully for the better.
- 9rx 2y ago> But AGI is important in the sense that it have a huge impact on the path humanity takes The only difference between AI and AGI is that AI is limited in how many tasks it can carry out (special intelligence), while AGI can handle a much broader range of tasks (general intelligence). If instead of one AGI that can do everything, you have many AIs that, together, can do everything, what's the practical difference? AGI is important only in that we are of the belief that it will be easier to implement than many AIs, which appeals to the lazy human.
- jes5199 2y agoI think you’re saying that you want a faster horse
- imtringued 2y agoI am thinking of designing machines to be used in a flexible manufacturing system and none of them will be humanoid robots. Humanoid robots suck for manufacturing. They're walking on a flat floor so what the heck do they need legs for? To fall over? The entire point of the original assembly line was to keep humans standing in the same spot instead of wasting time walking.